Supreme Court to hear case on refusal to fund service and Court of Protection

The Supreme Court will next week consider whether a commissioning body can, by its decision not to fund a particular option for contact, remove the jurisdiction of the Court of Protection to make a best interests decision about contact.

In N (Appellant) v ACCG and others (Respondents) UKSC 2015/0238 a five-justice panel – comprising Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lord Reed, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes – will also consider whether the failure to conduct a best interests assessment and/or determine the facts breached Mr N's rights under the ECHR to a fair trial and a family life?

The background to the case is that the appellant's son, MN, has complex disabilities and lacks capacity to litigate and to make decisions for himself.

He lives in an adult residential placement in the area of the first respondent (ACCG), who has refused to fund home visits.

The Court of Protection then refused to undertake an assessment of whether home visits were in MN's best interests, on the basis that they did not have jurisdiction to do so since home visits were not an available option. The appellant appealed.

The Court of Appeal ruling in MN (Adult) [2015] EWCA Civ 411 can be viewed here.

The Supreme Court will hear the case on 14-15 December.